03 March 2020

| CFF Feature on Affairs Nat'l | by Perrin Lovett: Now We Fight The Terrorists Over Here - “Terrorists” Meaning YOU

Well howdy, folks. Time for another journey into the affairs of a nation. It’s funny: Saturday, word reached me early that the US had reached an agreement with the Taliban to withdraw from the pointless, er, the Victorious! war in Afghanistan. I got all excited and called old MB about maybe writing it up for the coming week’s CFF column. I did and he ran it about four seconds after it hit the in-box. So… Here we are again, dear readers. I’m still happy that the Empire may soon depart Kabul, however, my excitement has been tempered by other developments. Rumor has it that the lunatics at the Pentagram want out of Middle Eastern entanglements … so they can ramp up a potential offensive against China and/or Russia. Yeah. How would that, if it came to pass, work out? Imagine the Afghan War fought against competent adversaries armed with nuclear weapons. Imagine it lasting considerably less than 19 years. But, that’s the flailing pipe dream of the Washingtonian psychotic class.

Another drop of rain on the parade is domestic. Specifically, the Domestic Terrorism Penalties Act of 2019 (-2020), HR 4187, wherein efforts formerly reserved for use against al-CIA-da, ISIS, and the Taliban Islamic Emirate (which the Empire does not recognize, except for signing treaties with…) would be turned on the American People. This potential law of Draconian proportions stands as another reason why one must support “conservatives'' over “socialists.” HR 4187 is supported by the socialist Demon-crat, Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) - along with 15 socialist Republican’ts. The Bill is the brainless child of socialist GOPer Mark Weber (R-TX). [15:1]: remember: support Republicans or else Democrats will win.

The Bill, more dangerous than useless, adds the dread charge of terrorism to crimes that are already illegal - murder, kidnapping, etc. And it introduces the element of thought crime, albeit in utterly thoughtless fashion. The keywords in the Bill are “Whoever,” “with the intent to intimidate or coerce,” “attempts or conspires,” “any person or property,” “a government,” and “interstate or foreign commerce.” The aim is to equate ordinary First-Amendment-protected statements - like those some make constantly on social media - with terrorism. The punishments range from 25 years in prison to the death penalty. The FBI is heavily pushing the legislation. Why? Because they think the majority population is a dire threat to someone. 

If passed, look forward to the law being used to prosecute Americans who “threaten” assorted grievance classes or the benevolent government by way of expressing “unpopular” opinions. Those of you on Facebook and Twitter take note: any post half critical of [pick something/someone] will be suspect. Social media posts affect interstate commerce - the DOJ says so - and no actual crime is necessary. The conspiracy. Supporting facts and evidence may be provided the old-fashioned way: by simply lying them into existence via perjury. Here’s how it might work:

State X proposes firearms confiscation. Twitterhead A posts a news link about State X’s proposition, including the following Tweetment: “Laws like this could lead to civil war. #NoCivilWar.” FBI Agent B swears in a warrant application that A said of X: “This is civil war. Kill X.” AUSA Y brings the case. At trial, Agent B admits that A never actually said what was sworn to the in the application. Despite this perjury, a total lack of evidence, and the obvious fact that A’s intent was to prevent violence, Judge C (as in “corrupt”) denies A’s attorney’s motions to dismiss or acquit and 12 wise jurors vote to convict A - of terrorism. A’s conviction might or might not be overturned on appeal. AUSA Y says the conviction is proof that the law was needed and works. State X uses the conviction as proof that only terrorists want firearms. In case you’re doubtful, this due process-less scenario plays out every month in American courts as-is with existing bad laws; I’ve been “A’s” attorney in exactly such a charade. 

The prosecution will be selective, geared towards silencing those the government and its owners find most inconvenient. A chilling effect, as it’s called. Real terrorists and criminals will continue their work unhindered. 

This Bill, like everything out of DC, does nothing to address the real problems facing the American People. I have ranked three of those as super-issues, perhaps for discussion in future columns. Pick your pet subject, and it likely fits under one or more of my three. There are few if any legal or political solutions at this point. Here, I must agree with our esteemed editor’s position in his letter to himself on Sunday. Not as to Tulsi, specifically, beyond my previous if-then suggestion for the leftists. No, it’s his statement: “Almost beyond repair.” “Almost” is the right word. Another terrible law won’t help. Could an election succeed in the fight against tyranny? Just remember that generally more elections = more politicians = more laws = you’re a terrorist. In closing and in practical furtherance: Super Tuesday. [Yawns]

Plurimae leges, minus iustitia. - Cicero